Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,679,297 times
Reputation: 2622
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by lauleahere&there
I vote for modern medical care, nutrition and education.
I'm not a fan of smallpox, superstition, infant mortality, human sacrifice or starvation.
Interesting, pre contact, no small pox in Hawaii,
infant mortality may not have been as high as Europe and America due to lack of disease,
more people were put to death for crimes in Europe and America each year than were sacrificed each year by the Aztecs, let alone the Hawaiians, generally those deaths were horrific.
Thomas Jefferson rewrote the criminal codes for Virginia at some point and dropped the Death Penalty crimes from 42 to 2.
Taro was a pretty good defense against starvation, although possibly starvation was the preferred alternative to eating that stuff.
Not exactly. Kamehameha never conquered Kauaʻi and Niʻihau. Although Kaumualiʻi (the ruler of Kauaʻi and Niʻihau) promised "allegiance" to Kamehameha, both of them were waiting for the opportunity to kill each other. Although few historians give her credit for it, Kaʻahumanu (Kamehameha's favorite and politically-astute wife) was the one that actually completed the unification of Hawaiʻi. After Kamehameha died in 1819, Kaʻahumanu ruled his domains as Kuhina Nui ("Queen Regent") "sharing" power with Liholiho (aka "Kamehameha II"). In order to truly unify Hawaiʻi, Kaʻahumanu and Liholiho had Kaumualiʻi kidnapped in 1821. Subsequently, Kaʻahumanu married Kaumualiʻi by force, which effectively unified Hawaiʻi.
If I had been around at that time, I probably would've been right in the middle of it, advising Kaumualiʻi, Kamehameha, or Kaʻahumanu. Thus, I would not want to live in "the Hawaiʻi of 200 years ago."
Interesting, pre contact, no small pox in Hawaii,
infant mortality may not have been as high as Europe and America due to lack of disease,
more people were put to death for crimes in Europe and America each year than were sacrificed each year by the Aztecs, let alone the Hawaiians, generally those deaths were horrific.
Thomas Jefferson rewrote the criminal codes for Virginia at some point and dropped the Death Penalty crimes from 42 to 2.
Taro was a pretty good defense against starvation, although possibly starvation was the preferred alternative to eating that stuff.
Lmao , agreed.
As for the rest: yes, pre-contact was different.
But, in any case, I would happily live a primitive life in Hawaii, but would probably not want to re-live Hawaiian history. If I were to go anywhere back in a time machine it would probably be "pre-humanoid" altogether
Fun, interesting thread so far.
Last edited by nullgeo; 01-18-2012 at 10:43 AM..
Reason: punctuation error!
I read an interview with the late actor Robert Mitchum in which he said that the period during which the Vietnam War was just getting going was the "golden age" in Hawaii.( He was a frequent Island visitor.) I'd vote for 1968 over either of the two choices in the poll.
I read an interview with the late actor Robert Mitchum in which he said that the period during which the Vietnam War was just getting going was the "golden age" in Hawaii.( He was a frequent Island visitor.) I'd vote for 1968 over either of the two choices in the poll.
Funny you should mention this ... I first arrived in Hawaii in 1966 -- on my way to Vietnam ... of course my memories of that first visit are pretty hazy ... no, not from age and years gone by ... because by the time I sobered up I was well out to sea again. I do recall bombing the sh*t out of Kaho'olawe, though (I was squadron air, not squid).
Anyhow, later it all came into perspective ... and yep, nice in the 60's ... real nice.
Seems to me that in pre contact Hawaii, life was great for the rulers, and sucked for everyone else.
Interesting that humans came to a new area, they had a chance to create paradise, but, they created a society that fought itself constantly.
Does not speak well for the human race, or the idea of a benevolent god.
Correct on all points.
But, as much as I always refer to the pygmy tribes of Africa as the finest models of civilization in the history of the planet and mankind, I certainly would always choose Hawaii over the Congo as preferred venue.
Let me start by saying the original intent of this poll was pointless. Flame Angel was goading nullgeo by saying that if you don't want one modern "convenience" (modern constuction), they you can't have any others. That is such an obvious fallacy, it shouldn't have even been considered.
But the randomly chosen date of 200 years ago reminds us of an incredible time in Hawaiian history: Post-contact but pre-modern state. Kamehameha had used Western guns to finally conquer all the islands (except Kaua'i) in bloody wars ('Iao valley on Maui in 1890 and Nu'uanu Valley on Oahu in 1895), but he still had the traditional ruling and belief system. Other than guns, some metal and a few trade items, most of the islands still lived in the stone age (which doesn't mean the people were uncivilized or uncultured--their language and arts were highly elaborate). In a few years, his successor would abolish the kapu system and then missionaries would arrive. So yes, the women were probably still topless at the time.
I'm pretty sure in 1812, there were already western diseases (Cook's first visit had brought VD), but I don't know (haven't yet googled) about smallpox. But Tiger Beer brings up a good point: it still would've been 99% homogenously ethnic Hawaiian people in the island. In an exercise like this, there is always the question of whether to consider the political reality (what it was really like living under--or as--chiefs, nobles, and the kapu system) or just the physical reality (availability of food and tools).
And as mentioned, it is an impossible reality for us to go back, or for the people that lived there at that time to have any choice about it. It just was and that was it. But some commenters are showing an incorrect, even biased, view of history. Since the islands were unified, there was much less warfare (Kaua'i still had some skirmishes and retaliation). I be life expectancy was longer than 40, they had a healthy diet and not too many diseases. Kamehameha was over 60 when he died--his age was uncertain. And when is death a pleasant experience, now or then?
And the Hawaiians had herbal medicines, not just superstition. Granted they were not as effective as modern pharmaceuticals, but they have been proven to contain compounds that would've helped in the cases for which they were given. Infant mortality is an unresolved question. That Hawaiians celebrated a baby's first birthday extravagantly suggests that there may have been some mortality before one year. But it also suggests there was less after the first year, unlike Europe: James Cook's 6 children died before he did, at the ages of 31, 17, 4, <1, <1, 17. As for putting people to death for public show, .highnlite is right to point out Western double-standard revisionist history: read up about drawing and quartering in England at that time when Wikipedia isn't blacked out anymore.
A better date of 300 years ago might've been more what Flame Angel intended: pre-contact stone-age Hawaiian culture. In between periods of warfare when some chiefs tried to take over their neighbors, there were periods of peace and prosperity on the various islands. Agriculture and aquaculture were highly developed and food was generally abundant. Don't know why people have to make fun of other cultures' food, seems just as ignorant as making fun of somebody's name. Taro was a key staple in their diet (though sweet potatoes were as well), and if you lived back then, you probably liked it. And if you don't like it today, you probably haven't eaten enough of it.
But .highnlite also wrote: "life was great for the rulers, and sucked for everyone else." I'm not so sure about that. There certainly was lots of physical labor, but it seems that it was paradise enough to provide plenty for everyone most of the time. In the first reports of contact, you don't read of the wretched conditions of serfs and sharecroppers that existed in Europe.
Also: "Interesting that humans came to a new area, they had a chance to create paradise, but, they created a society that fought itself constantly." This is pure ethnocentric bias. How was Hawaii anymore paradise than when the first people arrived in the Mediterranean, or Europe, or the Middle East? It is clear that when humans anywhere reach the natural (easy) carrying limits of the land, they fight over limited resources with their neighbors.
eureka1 wrote: "Robert Mitchum in which he said that the period during which the Vietnam War was just getting going was the "golden age" in Hawaii." And nullgeo added: "yep, nice in the 60's ... real nice." Probably no coincidence that it was the apogee of haole influence in Hawaii. Military mostly running the place and bombing whatever it wanted, new US state (takeover final), still had plantation mentality for the minorities, Japanese tourism and ownership not yet established, and Hawaiian renaissance not yet started. Granted, the islands weren't crowded and had most of the modern conveniences by then, but there were still a lot of minorities working on the sugar and pineapple plantations who might disagree with you.
Well - I don't think we'll ever know what the life expectancy was prior to pre-contact since there was no written language - I did see an article that Native Hawaiian life expectancy in the early 1900's was around 35 years old.
I'm not sure I'd dig the pre-contact years either - this article when talking about pre-contact Hawaii speaks to strangling or clubbing people to death for violating the Kapu System - ouch. hawaii tribes
Also, what about cannibalism? Do people really taste just like chicken?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
(I was squadron air, not squid).
